By David M. Greenwald
Executive Editor
San Francisco, CA – In a tweet thread, Chesa Boudin ended speculation that he would run against Brooke Jenkins for DA.
“I am choosing to put my family first: I will not be running for office in 2022,” Boudin wrote.
Boudin cited his obligations to his family—his young son and his father. “I’m committed to criminal justice reform; I’m also committed to my family,” he said.
He also defended his record, noting, “We made a lot of progress in a short period of time. I am particularly proud of our significant expansion of victims
services, including new programs to serve our AAPI community and the appointment of the first-ever multilingual Chinese American Victim Services Chief, our resentencing work that offered second chances to those who had caused harm and supported victims, our restorative justice work, our focus on accountability through behavioral health treatment, our Innocence Commission’s exoneration of a wrongly-convicted man, our innovative program tackling auto burglary fencing operations, our creation of a worker protection unit, our litigation against manufacturers of ghost guns, and our historic strides in police accountability.”
He added, “That work was just beginning; I had hoped it would become the foundation for continued progress.”
However, he expressed “grave concern” by the early actions from the appointed DA.
He said, “We have heard no assurances that the successful programs we’ve implemented will continue, and, indeed, we see worrying signs every day as progress is rolled back.
“I join the vast majority of San Franciscans in urging our elected—or, as is increasingly common, appointed—leaders to work for equal justice, evidence-based reforms, and improved services for victims,” Boudin added.
The announcement comes a day after appointed DA Jenkins held a press conference to announce she was revoking misdemeanor plea offers for drug offenders.
The DA’s office threw aspersions toward the previous DA, noting, “The new policy will also consider adding charging enhancements for drug dealing within 1,000 feet of a school and the office will potentially seek pre-trial detention of fentanyl dealers in extreme cases. The previous administration’s policy had no weight limit threshold, was not adhering to CJC guidelines, and allowed drug dealers, arrested with as much as 500 grams of fentanyl, and who had multiple open fentanyl cases, to be referred to CJC.”
District Attorney Jenkins also announced that she has revoked over 30 open plea offers put forward by the previous administration, including an egregious case involving one defendant who had six open cases—all for dealing fentanyl in the Tenderloin.
The question now is who will end up running against Jenkins in November.
Great news!
I’ll bet he already knew that he didn’t have a chance anyway.
The new DA gave him a chance. But, in the last several months, he had a kid, lost his mom, his dad got released after 40 or so years in prison, and he fought a long campaign and got recalled. Last time I talked to him, he was torn on what to do.
The new DA already in a short time appears to be doing a much better job than Boudin. Boudin had his chance and blew it.
Fighting a new war on drugs? Picking a fight with the public defenders? Not a recipe for success.
Your opinion. But then again you’re totally biased. And before you fire back, yes, I’m biased too. But the voters of SF agree with me if we go with the last election.
You know what happens when you arrest a whole bunch of drug dealers? A whole bunch new ones take their place, because you’re not dealing with the actual problem. We’ve been through this before, it didn’t work then, it won’t work now.
And if he did indeed deal with the actual problem it has done exactly what for the streets of SF under Boudin? The city was a cesspool under him. Time for change.
Largely he was scapegoated for things that were well outside of his control and not endemic to just San Francisco
I’ll bet everyone knows that I don’t care, one way or the other…
I care (moderately, or deeply) about many things, but not this one…
But, stories like this are the “raison d’etre” of some… c’est desolee…
I don’t think so.
None of those reasons would have mattered, if he hadn’t been recalled. If the recall failed, he’d be running for re-election.
He had no chance, after the successful recall.
Well, maybe he’ll be a public defender, somewhere. In any case, I suspect he won’t have any problem finding work.
Can’t help but think of the parallels with Trump (who also “lost his job”). (Honestly, the most interesting question is whether or not he’ll run again. I’m sticking with my prediction that he ultimately won’t. Truth be told, I kind of miss the chaos, but not the Supreme Court appointments.)